ObjectiveClinician educators (CEs) frequently report tensions in their professional identities as clinicians and educators, although some perceive a reciprocal relationship between clinical and teaching roles. However, it is unknown if the shared meanings of clinicians’ multiple job roles translate to identity verification. We sought to examine CEs’ perceptions of their clinician and educator roles and the influence of their perceptions on the salience of their professional identities.DesignQualitative individual interviews and focus groups, analysed using framework analytic approach.Setting and participants23 occupational therapy (OT) and 16 physiotherapy (PT) educators from two acute hospitals and one rehabilitation unit in Singapore.ResultsPT and OT CEs constructed shared meanings of their clinician and educator roles through overcoming feelings of unease and inadequacy, discovering commonalities and establishing relevance. However, shared meanings between clinician and educator roles might not necessarily lead to mutual verification of their professional identities. Individuals’ cognitive flexibility and openness to additional roles, and organisations’ expectations had a mediating effect on the identity integration process. Less experienced CEs reported feelings of distress juggling the competing demands of both clinician and educator roles, whereas more experienced CEs appeared to be more capable of prioritising their job roles in different situations, which could be a result of differences in adaptation to frequent interruptions in clinical setting. Emphasis on patient statistics could result in failure in achieving identity verification, leading to feelings of distress.ConclusionFaculty developers should take into consideration the episodic nature of the educator identity construction process and develop induction programmes to assist CEs in building integrated identities.
BackgroundmLearning is increasingly presented as an attractive novel educational strategy for medical and nursing education. Yet, evidence base for its effectiveness or factors which influence use, success, implementation or adoption are not clear. We aim to synthesise findings from qualitative studies to provide insight into the factors (barriers and facilitators) influencing adoption, implementation and use of mobile devices for learning in medical and nursing education. The review also aims to identify factors or actions which are considered to optimise the experience and satisfaction of educators and learners in using mobile technologies for medical and nursing education and to identify strategies for improving mLearning interventions for medical and nursing education.MethodsA systematic search will be conducted across a range of databases for studies describing or evaluating the experiences, barriers, facilitators and factors pertaining to the use of mLearning for medical and nursing education. The framework synthesis approach will be used to organise and bring different components of the results together. The confidence in the qualitative review findings will be assessed using the CERQual approach.DiscussionThis study will contribute to the planning and design of effective mLearning and the development of mLearning guidelines for medical and nursing education.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016035411 Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0354-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The increasing complexity of healthcare needs underlines the growing importance of interprofessional education and collaborative practice (IPECP) in enhancing quality of patient care. In particular, clinician educators play an influential role in advocating IPECP. The primary goal of our exploratory pilot study is to explore 34 clinician educators' attitudes towards IPECP by using the adapted 14-item Attitudes Toward Health Care Teams Scale (ATHCTS) and 15-item Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS). Mean scores of ATHCTS and RIPLS were 3.81 (SD = 0.90) and 4.02 (SD = 0.79), respectively. Using exploratory factor analysis, we identified four factors: team value (ATHCTS), team efficiency (ATHCTS), teamwork and collaboration (RIPLS), and professional socialisation (RIPLS). The "team efficiency" factor on the ATHCTS scored lowest (factor mean = 3.49) compared with other factors (factor means = 3.87-4.08). Correlation analyses revealed that the "team efficiency" factor had small correlations with other factors (r = -0.05-0.37). Our clinician educators valued IPECP in promoting teamwork and professional socialisation but they perceived IPECP to compromise efficiency. The issue of perceived inefficiency by clinician educators merits attention in order to promote wider implementation of IPECP.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.